EDITOR — It is important that we have certain sectors of the Zimbabwean economy declared “no go areas” for foreigners whose participation in what should otherwise be reserve sectors is milking the country dry. It is not in the interest of the country to have a “free for all”, unregulated participation of foreigners in every sector of the country’s economy.
I would not mind to have them bringing in more capital and investing it in other capital intensive areas where the spinoff benefits can stimulate businesses run by the locals.
Assuming that I, as a local, invests some US$50,000 locally and earn US$60,000 yearly, guess what would be the multiplier effect? Obviously it will be quite substantial. But all that would have been repatriated if it were a foreigner who would have invested the US$50 000.
I am therefore not surprised that Nigerians chased away Ghanaians from their country citing the problem of “unemployment”, which was arising because they were taking jobs that should have been for the locals. In their reasoning, a Ghanaian teacher living with his/her family in Nigeria was more likely to spend more than 80 percent of his/her income in Nigeria and not this thing of unregulated repatriation of profits. My apologies for citing Nigerians as an example.
But which of the two is worse, unemployment or the siphoning of resources by foreigners?